Here we go……..
Da Bear sits here today pondering, I wonder who will be the last to leave Baghdad? In the Vietnam Conflict that disconcerting title belonged MGySgt John J. Valdez. A brave man, he was the last to leave the roof of the US Embassy in Saigon on the day we “won” the peace in Viet Nam. Now we wait, with bated breath, the world-renowned Baker Commission report that will tell us how the United States will “win” in Iraq. Here is a snipet from one of the participants, Cliff May:
I’ve been a member of the “expert” advisory group of the Baker/Hamilton panel. The frustration I and a few others faced: We thought our task was to develop options to move forward in Iraq. Most of our colleagues thought the task was to develop options to move out of Iraq.
In other words, the few hawks (or conservatives or neo-cons or whatever you want to call them) were arguing not for “victory” as Bush once envisioned it (Iraq as a shining city on the Middle Eastern hill) but against accepting defeat at the hands of such groups al Qaeda in Iraq and Saddam loyalists, against lamely attempting to disguise defeat as “redeployment” or “an exit strategy.” At the very least, we implored, let’s imagine and plan for the likely consequences of American defeat. That was derided as subscribing to the “domino theory.”
The Foreign Policy Establishment types who dominate the Iraq Study Group had opposed the war from the start and, in my view, mostly wanted to send Bush this message: “Idiot! We told you so!”
Da Bear sits here today pondering, I wonder who will be the last to leave Baghdad? In the Vietnam Conflict that disconcerting title belonged MGySgt John J. Valdez. A brave man, he was the last to leave the roof of the US Embassy in Saigon on the day we “won” the peace in Viet Nam. Now we wait, with bated breath, the world-renowned Baker Commission report that will tell us how the United States will “win” in Iraq. Here is a snipet from one of the participants, Cliff May:
I’ve been a member of the “expert” advisory group of the Baker/Hamilton panel. The frustration I and a few others faced: We thought our task was to develop options to move forward in Iraq. Most of our colleagues thought the task was to develop options to move out of Iraq.
In other words, the few hawks (or conservatives or neo-cons or whatever you want to call them) were arguing not for “victory” as Bush once envisioned it (Iraq as a shining city on the Middle Eastern hill) but against accepting defeat at the hands of such groups al Qaeda in Iraq and Saddam loyalists, against lamely attempting to disguise defeat as “redeployment” or “an exit strategy.” At the very least, we implored, let’s imagine and plan for the likely consequences of American defeat. That was derided as subscribing to the “domino theory.”
The Foreign Policy Establishment types who dominate the Iraq Study Group had opposed the war from the start and, in my view, mostly wanted to send Bush this message: “Idiot! We told you so!”
The debate is coming. Yeah, right.
Given today’s leadership.......I can hear them gassing up the choppers. Stay tuned kids, the sequel is about to begin. Some alternative........
No comments:
Post a Comment